Tag: immigration

Immigration destroys culture

It’s fascinating to see that so many people still stubbornly clinging to outmoded concepts like Magic Dirt, Melting Pot, and Propositional Nation when all three ideas have been thoroughly rendered null and void by the ongoing mass movement of peoples and the dyscivic behavior of the invaders:

An immigrant group based in Bern has called for the emblematic white cross to be removed from the Swiss national flag because as a Christian symbol it “no longer corresponds to today’s multicultural Switzerland.”

Ivica Petrusic, the vice president of Second@s Plus, a lobbying group that represents mostly Muslim second-generation foreigners in Switzerland (who colloquially are known as secondos) says the group will launch a nationwide campaign in October to ask Swiss citizens to consider adopting a flag that is less offensive to Muslim immigrants.

In a September 18 interview with the Swiss newspaper Aargauer Zeitung, Petrusic said the cross has a Christian background and while the Christian roots of Switzerland should be respected, “it is necessary to separate church and state” because “Switzerland today has a great religious and cultural diversity. One has to ask if the State wants to continue building up a symbol in which many people no longer believe.”

In the interview, Petrusic said Switzerland needs new symbols with which everyone, including non-Christians, can identify. As an alternative to the current Swiss flag, Petrusic proposed the former flag of the Helvetic Republic (see image here) which was officially introduced in 1799 and consisted of green, red and yellow colors. “Those colors are similar to the current flags of Bolivia and Ghana and would represent a more progressive and open-minded Switzerland,” Petrusic said.

The proposal to change the Swiss flag has been met with outrage across the political spectrum and is sure to fuel anti-immigrant sentiments in Switzerland.

I tend to doubt this unexpected public statement by the senior commander of the Swiss Armed Forces is entirely unrelated to those sentiments.

Swiss army chief André Blattmann warned, in a Swiss newspaper article on Sunday, the risks of social unrest in Europe are soaring. Recalling the experience of 1939/1945, Blattman fears the increasing aggression in public discourse is an explosively hazardous situation, and advises the Swiss people to arm themselves and warns that the basis for Swiss prosperity is “being called into question.”

When even military commanders are telling the people to gun up, war is on the way.

As in Europe, so in America

Patrick Buchanan sees a similar future to the one John Red Eagle and I predicted in Cuckservative: How “Conservatives” Betrayed America:

What was predicted, 14 years ago, has come to pass.

Migrants into Germany from the Middle and Near East reached 1 million in 2015. EU bribes to the Turks to keep Muslim migrants from crossing over to the Greek islands, thence into the Balkans and Central Europe, are unlikely to stop the flood.

My prediction that European “patriots will recapture control of their national destinies,” looks even more probable today.

Prime Minister David Cameron, who almost lost a referendum on Scottish secession, is demanding a return of British sovereignty from the EU sufficient to satisfy his countrymen, who have been promised a vote on whether to abandon the European Union altogether.

Marine Le Pen’s anti-EU National Front ran first in the first round of the 2015 French elections. Many Europeans believe she will make it into the final round of the next presidential election in 2017.

Anti-immigrant, right-wing parties are making strides all across Europe, as the EU is bedeviled by a host of crises.

Europe’s open borders that facilitate free trade also assure freedom of travel to homegrown terrorists.

Mass migration into the EU is causing member nations to put up checkpoints and close borders. The Schengen Agreement on the free movement of goods and people is being ignored or openly violated.

The economic and cultural clash between a rich northern Europe and a less affluent south — Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal — manifest in the bad blood between Athens and Berlin, endures.

Northern Europeans grow weary of repeated bailouts of a south that chafes at constant northern demands for greater austerity.

Then there is the surge of sub-nationalism, as in Scotland, Catalonia, Flanders, and Veneto, where peoples seek to disconnect from distant capitals that no longer speak for them, and reconnect with languages, traditions and cultures that give more meaning to their lives than the economics-uber-alles ideology of Frau Angela Merkel.

Moreover, the migrants entering Europe, predominantly Islamic and Third World, are not assimilating as did the European and largely Christian immigrants to America of a century ago.

The enclaves of Asians in Britain, Africans and Arabs around Paris, and Turks in and around Berlin seem to be British, French and German in name only. And some of their children are now heeding the call to jihad against the Crusaders invading Muslim lands.

The movement toward deeper European integration appears to have halted, and gone into reverse, as the EU seems to be unraveling along ideological, national, tribal and historic lines.

If these trends continue, and they seem to have accelerated in 2015, the idea of a United States of Europe dies, and with it the EU.

And this raises a question about the most successful economic and political union in history – the USA.

How does an increasingly multiracial, multiethnic, multilingual, multicultural United States avoid the fate to which Europe appears to be headed, when there is no identifiable racial or ethnic majority here in 2042?

The USA cannot survive in its current form because an idea is not a nation.

Not an invasion?

The only reason the mass “immigration” is not seen as an invasion is because the West is not resisting it:

Some 800 to 1,000 migrants tried on Thursday to
break into the Channel Tunnel near the French port city of Calais in a
desperate bid to reach Britain, local officials said, triggering chaotic
scenes that saw traffic disrupted and security forces firing tear gas
to disperse the crowds.

“We
noted the presence of 800 to 1,000 migrants” near the tunnel, a
local official told AFP, as a police source described the numbers as
“unprecedented” for daytime. People normally try to cross over under
cover of darkness, often having paid exorbitant sums to smugglers to
make dangerous, even life-threatening bids to reach the other side of
the Channel. “As they approached the tunnel, several migrants tried hard
to slow down the flow of traffic so they could climb into the trucks,”
the source said.

An
AFP journalist saw young men climb on top of trucks heading
towards Britain, with some cutting through the tarpaulin covering the
vehicles to get inside. Others could be seen helping their friends climb
into the back of a white truck. Several people succeeded in their bid
to enter the Channel Tunnel site, the journalist said. “Security forces
were deployed… objects were being thrown at them, and they had to
resort to using tear gas,” police said in a statement.

Obviously these totally non-invasive immigrants are perfectly willing to resort to force if it is required.

Nationalist rising in the Netherlands

They are not “un-Netherlandish”, they are defending the Netherlands, since their government has completely failed to do so.

Police had to fire warning shots into the air when thousands of Dutch protestors stormed the site of a planned asylum centre, shortly to open for 1,500 refugees.

The demonstrators went on the rampage in the small town of Geldermalsen last night in the worst riot of its kind in the Netherlands since the refugee crisis began.

A planned discussion about the imminent arrival of the migrants, staged by the town council, was abandoned in the chaos as the mob outside tried to storm the building. Councillors were forced to flee out of rear exits into police vans. Fences around the planned asylum camp were smashed down or cut through in the rioting. Police were pelted with bottles and fireworks before they drew their firearms and fired warning shots into the air.

The crowd shouted ‘no niggers here!’ and ‘foreign scum keep away!’ and left the town hall looking like a ‘battlefield’ with broken windows and chipped brickwork.

Running skirmishes between youths and the police went on until the early hours of Thursday morning.

The mayoress, Miranda de Vries, said she was shocked at the violence caused by an estimated 2,500 people in the town of 27,000 that lies near the city of Utrecht.

It was by far the biggest and the most violent outbreak of anti-immigrant sentiment in the country.

Deputy justice minister Klaas Dijkhoff responsible for managing Holland’s intake of refugees, called the protestors ‘un-Netherlanderish’.

As Instapundit notes, when ten percent of the population is rioting, it is no longer a fringe phenomenon. Since the EU ruling class has made it very clear they will not respect the democratically expressed will of the people, it falls upon the people to express their will by other means.

This, again, is why I am amused by Americans ignorantly pronouncing the imminent death of the European nations due to multiculturalism. Everywhere from Italy to Finland, including the famously tolerant Netherlands, nationalists are not merely talking about the government-assisted invasion of their nations, they are taking action.

Americans, on the other hand, aren’t doing anything at all, beyond flirting with the idea of possibly voting for Donald Trump. If, you know, that’s not considered too declasse by their social circles.

Meanwhile, over 100,000 Syrians have been settled in the USA:

A proposal to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees to the United States has ignited a bitter debate in Washington, but more than 10 times that number of people from the embattled country have quietly come to America since 2012, according to figures obtained by FoxNews.com.

Some 102,313 Syrians were granted admission to the U.S. as legal permanent residents or through programs including work, study and tourist visas from 2012 through August of this year, a period which roughly coincides with the devastating civil war that still engulfs the Middle Eastern country.

The heart of the debate

Donald Trump sums up the existential question:

“I have a very hardline position – we either have a country or we don’t have a country.”

That’s Trump, explaining why he might be the one candidate GOP voters can trust on immigration.

The problem, of course, is that far too many Americans have been convinced that their country is nothing more than an idea. A “proposition nation”. Which is to say that it doesn’t exist at all.

Those who are fixated on the various policies espoused by the different candidates are failing to grasp the situation: America is not a given. And after being invaded by 60 million foreigners, America is already not America.

That’s why they talk about New America. New America sounds very exciting and progressive and all, but the key thing is to understand that in this context, “new” is synonymous with “not”.

Reformers turn restrictionist

Donald Trump has a convert, and then some, in Larry Kudlow:

I’ve Changed. This Is War. Seal the Borders. Stop the Visas.

I know this is not my usual position. But this is a war. Therefore I have come to believe there should be no immigration or visa waivers until the U.S. adopts a completely new system to stop radical Islamic terrorists from entering the country. A wartime lockdown. And a big change in my thinking.

ISIS and related Islamic terrorists are already here. More are coming. We must stop them.

Until FBI director James Comey gives us the green light, I say seal the borders.

Here’s what we must do: Completely reform the vetting process for immigrants and foreign visitors. Change the screening process. Come up with a new visa-application review process. Stop this nonsense of marriage-visa fraud. And in the meantime, seal the borders. I agree with Jessica Vaughn, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, who argued many of these points in excellent detail on the National Review website on Friday.

Again, why am I taking this hardline position? In the past, I have been an immigration reformer, not a restrictionist. But we are at war. That changes everything.

This is an expected, but delightful, development. It won’t be long before the American mainstream endorses mass repatriations. That is the best possible outcome; a widespread resurgence of peaceful nationalism that is not unlawfully resisted by an anti-democratic internationalist elite.

  1. Stop all visas, green cards, and immigration.
  2. Seal the borders. 
  3. Repatriate all illegals, criminals, dual-citizens, and nationals from Muslim countries.
  4. Debate and formulate a new immigration system that will return the US demographics to a reasonable facsimile of 1965 over time.
  5.  Implement the new system.

Ignoring the elephant

Paul Krugman may call it “ugliness”, but he nevertheless does a better job of explaining the massive shift in American and European politics to frightened American left-liberals than one might have expected. Unfortunately, he omitted the most important element, which is to say, immigration:

My European friends will no doubt say that I’m oversimplifying, but from an American perspective it looks as if Europe’s establishment has tried to freeze the xenophobic right, not just out of political power, but out of any role in acceptable discourse. To be a respectable European politician, whether of the left or of the right, you have had to accept the European project of ever-closer union, of free movement of people, open borders, and harmonized regulations. This leaves no room for right-wing nationalists, even though right-wing nationalism has always had substantial popular support.

What the European establishment may not have realized, however, is that its ability to define the limits of discourse rests on the perception that it knows what it is doing. Even admirers and supporters of the European project (like me) have to admit that it has never had deep popular support or a lot of democratic legitimacy. It is, instead, an elite project sold largely on the claim that there is no alternative, that it is the path of wisdom.

And there’s nothing quite like sustained poor economic performance – the kind of poor performance brought on by Europe’s austerity and hard-money obsessions — to undermine the elite’s reputation for competence. That’s probably why one recent study found a consistent historical relationship between financial crises and the rise of right-wing extremism. And history is repeating itself.

The story is quite different in America, because the Republican Party hasn’t tried to freeze out the kind of people who vote National Front in France. Instead, it has tried to exploit them, mobilizing their resentment via dog whistles to win elections. This was the essence of Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy,” and explains why the G.O.P. gets the overwhelming majority of Southern white votes.

But there is a strong element of bait-and-switch to this strategy. Whatever dog whistles get sent during the campaign, once in power the G.O.P. has made serving the interests of a small, wealthy economic elite, especially through big tax cuts, its main priority — a priority that remains intact, as you can see if you look at the tax plans of the establishment presidential candidates this cycle.

Sooner or later the angry whites who make up a large fraction, maybe even a majority, of the G.O.P. base were bound to rebel — especially because these days much of the party’s leadership seems inbred and out of touch.

What the liberal-left elite tends to forget is that a lot of liberals and left-wingers are still nationalists at heart. They may want a liberal, or a left-wing France, or America, or Britain, but they still want it to be identifiably France, America, or Britain. That’s why Front National, Trump, and UKIP, among others, are actually drawing more heavily from the Socialists, the Democrats, and Labour than they are from the center-right parties.

Immigration is a cross-spectrum issue, and until you realize that, you cannot understand that it is the only issue that matters in Western politics now. Everything else is akin to worrying about the details of French pension payments when the Wehrmacht is blitzkrieging past the Maginot Line.

It’s not conservatism, it’s NATIONALISM

The coming Republican civil war on immigration:

“This is not conservatism.” With those four simple words, House Speaker Paul Ryan dismissed Republican front-runner Donald Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban Muslims from entry into the United States until the federal government gets terrorism committed in the name of Islam figured out.

“This is not what our party stands for,” Ryan added, “and, more importantly, it’s not what our country stands for.”

That may depend on how the party is defined. While elected Republicans have almost unanimously distanced themselves from Trump’s Muslim gambit, one poll found that nearly two-thirds of GOP voters agreed with him. Another determined that more than three-fourths believe the United States is accepting too many immigrants from the Middle East.

There is a civil war in the Republican Party on immigration. Those on Trump’s side tend to see the enemy as including the party’s leadership, consultants, intellectuals and donor class. (The dust-up over Trump and Muslims is likely to bolster that perception.) But they’ve been courted by other GOP presidential candidates too, including Ted Cruz, Scott Walker and Rick Santorum.

Walker is already out of the race and Santorum has stalled in the low single digits. But Cruz is ascendant and Trump has been leading in the New Hampshire polls for a longer period of time than Walker’s presidential campaign lasted.

Trump isn’t the most articulate or consistent spokesman for immigration control in the GOP. That distinction goes to Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. And Trump’s Republican critics would be the first to point out he isn’t the most conservative. But his rise has fueled a family argument inside the party about how conservatives should view immigration.

Ryan’s position has a long conservative pedigree. He has followed in Jack Kemp’s intellectual footsteps. He can cite Ronald Reagan as well. The Wall Street Journal editorial page that championed Kemp and Reagan’s tax cuts also called for open borders. Republicans like Ryan tend to see America as a proposition or an idea, defined by the political principles laid out in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.

In this telling, immigration affirms the truths we hold to be self-evident, particularly that all men are created equal and the unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness. The willingness of immigrants to come here is a testament to the success of those principles. “Immigration,” writes veteran conservative columnist George Will, “is the entrepreneurial act of taking the risk of uprooting oneself and plunging into uncertainty.”

Restricting immigration, according to these Republicans, isn’t conservative because it requires government bureaucracies to interfere in labor markets. Immigration is like free trade and restricting it is like protectionism.

Read that last sentence again. Those who have read Cuckservative: How “Conservatives” Betrayed America will now understand, if they didn’t already, why we addressed free trade and immigration in the Immigration and Economics chapter, because the latter, in its open-borders variant, is a subset of the former.

It’s interesting, is it not, that the cuckservatives are willing to fight fellow Republicans to the death, but they’re always eager to negotiate a genteel surrender with the liberals. Of course, as we showed when discussing the six conservative principles laid out by Russell Kirk, cuckservatives reject the last two.

Oh, the irony

There are neither faces nor palms big enough to suffice:

The violence follows a weekend of clashes in asylum centres across the country. In one asylum centre in the former airport of Tempelhof in Berlin, police had to intervene after a fight started as migrants queued for food.

That came at the same time as another fight in the Berlin suburb of Spandau, where migrants attacked one another with fire extinguishers. Windows were smashed and sofas thrown, leaving several migrants wounded. Some 500 people had be to be evacuated from the migrant centre in “fear and panic”.

Germany’s police union has previously called for migrants to be separated by country of origin to minimise the risk of inter-ethnic tension.

Let’s see. You are going to separate THE PEOPLE YOU LET INTO YOUR COUNTRY by country of origin TO MINIMISE THE RISK OF INTER-ETHNIC TENSION.

That’s not minimizing the risk of inter-ethnic tension. Minimizing the risk of inter-ethnic tension would involve kicking all the non-German ethnics out and keeping them out.

Immigration is rape culture. Immigration is culture rape.

And the orcs smiled

This story, which is either tragic or darkly and predictably comic depending upon your sense of humor, is why those who want to help the poor refugees should go and help them there, not invite them and welcome them into the West. Dottoressa italiana uccisa in Kenya: rapina in casa:

Un medico di Novara, Rita Fossaceca, 51 anni, è stata uccisa in Kenya, dove stata lavorando per la onlus ForLife Onlus. La Farnesina ha confermato che si è trattato di una rapina in casa, in località Mijomboni, e i responsabili sono banditi comuni. Non ci sarebbe quindi alcun collegamento con il terrorismo. Feriti altri tre italiani che abitavano nella stessa casa.

Italian doctor murdered in Kenya: robbed in her house

A doctor from Novara, Rita Fossaceca, 51, was murdered in Kenya where she was working for the NGO ForLife Onlus. It was confirmed that the Farnesinan was robbed in her house, in the town of Mijomboni, and that local bandits were responsible. Her death does not appear to have been related to terrorism. Three other Italians who lived in the same house were also wounded.

I have a modicum of respect for those like Rita Fossaceca, who knowingly take their lives into their hands by going and living among the orcs of Mordor because they feel compassion for them. That being said, they aren’t missionaries, they aren’t risking their lives in order to preach the Word of God, they’re taking these risks in order to try to teach zebras dressage.

That being said, I have nothing but the greatest contempt for those anti-civilizational, dyscivic fools who dishonestly claim that we have a moral obligation to permit the orcs to enter the Shire. That’s not shrieking, bigoted cowardice, that is common sense and protecting the defenseless.

At least La Fossaceca has, by her sacrifice, done us the service of highlighting the consequences of nonsense such as this. ”Con una scuola abbiamo ridato il sorriso ai bambini dell’Africa”

“With a school, we have given a smile to the children of Africa.” 

I can’t help but wonder, though, if the children of Africa were smiling when they robbed and murdered her.